What if enough flame throwing robot dogs escape into the local environment for them to become an endemic invasive species? Then could we be able to terminate any liability associated with the barbequing of the general public?
Comment on You can now buy a flame-throwing robot dog for under $10,000
JustZ@lemmy.world 6 months agoThat’s a legit point under common law. The owner or keeper of a wild animal is generally strictly liable for damage caused by the animal, except if the animal is local fauna, in which case liability terminates on the animal’s escape back into the wild. I don’t know of any place with native flame throwing robots.
Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 6 months ago
JustZ@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Obviously then yes it would be fine.
Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Perfect, the plan is coming together well.
WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Theoretically if Amazon drones become wide spread in the environment and I capture one, attach a flamethrower to it, and the above scenario happens after I release it back into the wild, would that defense then apply as Amazon drones are native to the environment?
JustZ@lemmy.world 6 months ago
That would probably fall under intentional torts rather than strict animal liability. If you do, put up some vague “is this your drone?” flyers with a blurry photo, wait a bit, take the drone to the vet and pay the bill in your name, and build the evidence of your keepership, because you’ll have to admit being a keeper for the defense to work. Also, owners or keepers are liable, and this is one of those rare times in law when or also means and, and Amazon will probably help you defend the case in chief, though they will probably come after you next. This does not constitute legal advice.